Here's an update: "All SMTPSenderRefused is telling you is that Sendmail didn't like the sender's address, meaning it wasn't conformant to the relevant RFCs to be an Internet e-mail address. If you're just checking the formatting, it's about as good as you'll find anywhere. If you're looking for a valid delivery location, the only true test is to send it and not receive a bounce, which really only means that the other machine didn't tell you it was not valid." On Sun, Nov 25, 2001 at 08:52:13AM -0800, Bruce Eckel wrote:
Yes, the invalid sender was actually the problem, since that is the address that the registrant has filled out in the form. I'm trying to figure out now whether this test is reliable enough that I can ignore the other checks of the email address, or if I should do those on top of this.
So it appears from this that one could skip our format-checking code, and just catch SMTPSenderRefused as a test for the validity of the email address formatting. The value of this is that if the RFCs change, someone else would update the format-checking code (in sendmail). *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 11/25/01 at 8:28 AM Jim Washington wrote:
Bruce Eckel wrote:
Thanks! I spent a bit of time refactoring it. Also, I decided that if it worked it would return the address, otherwise it would return None to indicate failure.
[refactored code snipped]
Interesting style! Thanks! Always good to learn a new thing or two. Do you plan to work on the other part about querying the SMTP server about whether it accepts mail for [email_address]?
-- Jim Washington
Most current information can be found at: http://www.mindview.net/Etc/notes.html =================== Bruce Eckel http://www.BruceEckel.com Contains free electronic books: "Thinking in Java 2e" & "Thinking in C++ 2e" Please subscribe to my free newsletter -- just send any email to: join-eckel-oo-programming@earth.lyris.net My schedule can be found at: http://www.mindview.net/Calendar ===================